[middisc] TCP middlebox option requirements

"Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com> Fri, 21 May 2010 09:06 UTC

Return-Path: <ananth@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: middisc@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: middisc@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F03A3A7AF5 for <middisc@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 May 2010 02:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.766
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.766 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.767, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZYcJFGgdmKp6 for <middisc@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 May 2010 02:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914CD3A7D28 for <middisc@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 May 2010 23:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApgFAPzF9UurR7Hu/2dsb2JhbACSBowacaNNmUWCWYI5BINA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,276,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="132817398"
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 May 2010 06:32:11 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o4L6WBCD013099 for <middisc@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 May 2010 06:32:11 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.176]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 20 May 2010 23:32:11 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 23:32:10 -0700
Message-ID: <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC5809BD740A@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: TCP middlebox option requirements
Thread-Index: Acr4r1dR7jCphXynRIuv4YZC49ei3g==
From: "Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com>
To: middisc@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 May 2010 06:32:11.0198 (UTC) FILETIME=[57F2DDE0:01CAF8AF]
Subject: [middisc] TCP middlebox option requirements
X-BeenThere: middisc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions on TCP option for middlebox discovery." <middisc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/middisc>, <mailto:middisc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/middisc>
List-Post: <mailto:middisc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:middisc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/middisc>, <mailto:middisc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 09:06:52 -0000

Hi,
   I am just taking the liberty to post the first email on this mailing
list. During our last call there was talk about the requirements of this
TCP option. From our pov, the following would be the general
requirements of the TCP option.


Reason for TCP option :

- A standard TCP option is needed because every vendor cannot have one
option for the same purpose of auto-discovery and capability exchange.
By standardizing the TCP option, firewalls etc., are aware of this
option and problems can be avoided.

Requirements of this TCP option :

- There has to be a vendor ID (OUI) which would identify the specific
vendor. This is needed because every vendors option format is going to
be 
different.

- Already existing non-standardized option numbers (TCP option 33,
riverbed's options no's) for doing auto discovery should not be
allocated for this new TCP option. This is to prevent any confusion.

- The TCP option needs to be variable length to permit multiple option
formats since the option size may vary depending on the vendor.

- This TCP option should be advocated for use only by middleboxes.


My guess is that these requirements may be common for all the vendors or
there may be some additional requirements not covered by this post. In
either case we can continue the discussion and come to some conclusions.

-Anantha